Photo just fails to do the basic

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by aicul, May 8, 2016.

  1. aicul macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Location:
    no cars, only boats
    #1
    I'm slowly wondering if Apple has lost their senses with Photo app. It just fails to do the basics.

    One would expect a easy import of photos. No way the photos have to be sorted into bursts, movies, etc. But in reality what happened to the "events" where photos were grouped in a human logical manner ?

    Then comes the photo stream; yeah its cool; but then you don't really understand where the photo is you want to archive. As photo stream will happily delete old photos. So you think you have them but you don't.

    And so forth.

    Adding functionality to photos is sure a good thing; but maybe it should be robust and ambiguity free on the basics; that is simple archiving of photographs. The rest is pure add-on.
     
  2. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #2
    Yep, I came to that conclusion once they officially dumped Aperture and killed off iPhoto. Actually for me, I saw the writing on the wall and figured the new app would be gutted of all the features I enjoyed out of both apps.
     
  3. Belgique macrumors member

    Belgique

    Joined:
    May 6, 2016
    Location:
    Ocala, Floridah
    #3
    If it were up to me, I would have given the Geek Developers who created the last iPhoto, their last check and an escort to the parking lot. I delete photos, empty the trash and they are still there. Its a horrible app and its not intuitive at all. Most users want the ability to crop, delete etc but no one at apple thought of that.
     
  4. Big Stevie macrumors 6502a

    Big Stevie

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Location:
    UK
    #4
    I hate Photos and don't use it, I still use iPhoto which I absolutely love. Can anyone recommend an alternative app to iPhoto please for when the time comes when Apple force me to stop me using it?

    Thanks
     
  5. kyjaotkb macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Location:
    London, UK
    #5
    Agree - Photos is an absolute nightmare. Having lost "Events" is sad. I also miss "Places" where I could navigate my photos on a map in a dedicated section of the app. Oh and face recognition is ridiculously bad. I am seriously considering saving 70GB on my SSD and migrating all my photos to Google Photos, which I already use (and even there Apple broke something - sync between iPhoto and Google Photos was good, sync between Apple Photos and Google Photos is very buggy...).
    I think the Photos app debacle is as bad as the Apple maps one (I live in the UK and France and it's still very bad here, despite all the recent purported improvements in countries like the US, China or Germany).
     
  6. TheRainKing macrumors 6502a

    TheRainKing

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2012
    #6
    It's a pile of ****.

    On iPhoto I could search title, keyword, location etc simultaneously, but in the Photos app you can only choose one search option.
     
  7. interstella macrumors regular

    interstella

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2013
    Location:
    Suffolk, England
    #7
    I'm glad I'm not alone in thinking that Photos is a complete waste of time and space!
     
  8. Big Stevie macrumors 6502a

    Big Stevie

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Location:
    UK
    #8
    Does upgrading to El Capitan automatically delete iPhoto?

    Ive remained on Yosemite just to be safe. Am I ok to upgrade on my macbook?
     
  9. robgendreau macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    #9
    I have no idea why Yosemite would be safer (there have been security updates in subsequent systems), but El Capitan doesn't delete iPhoto, and it continues to work.

    BUT beware of one thing: if you use Photos to convert your iPhoto library for use in Photos it is no longer usable in iPhoto. It should convert by making a copy, but if you were to delete the original iPhoto library you'd be hosed. And of course changes you made in Photos wouldn't be backwards compatible.

    There are bazillions of alternatives, but it sort of depends on your needs. Photos is pretty much it's own little universe, a front end to iCloud Photo Library. And edited images and albums (like say a crop and change to BW) can be browsed from the Media section of the Finder.

    The alternatives fall into two groups: the kind like Lightroom, Capture One, Photos Supreme, etc that do non-destructive editing like Photos or Aperture and keep track of changes. They also reference images, meaning point to them rather than copy them into something like a "library," although some can do both, like iPhoto. Others are browsers, sort of like the Finder but beefed up for images. Adobe's Bridge, Lyn, Mylio, XnviewMP, and Graphic Converter are examples of those.
     
  10. Big Stevie macrumors 6502a

    Big Stevie

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Location:
    UK
    #10
    By safer I meant that I would be guaranteed to retain iPhoto as I wasn't sure if upgrading to El Capitan would delete iPhoto and replace it with Photos.

    I don't use Photos at all, I tried it and hated it.
     
  11. jasnw macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2013
    Location:
    Seattle Area (NOT! Microsoft)
    #11
    I upgraded to El Capitan from Mavericks via a clean install. I had to download iPhoto from the app store, and I ignore or disable everything that pops up wanting to do anything with the Photos app, but iPhoto is running fine on El Capitan so far (other than a general laggy behavior across most apps).
     
  12. Big Stevie macrumors 6502a

    Big Stevie

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Location:
    UK
    #12
    Thats one of my worries, Some people have reported that iPhoto isn't available for them to download again.
     
  13. jasnw macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2013
    Location:
    Seattle Area (NOT! Microsoft)
    #13
    I think this problem was fixed, but with Apple you never know if a "fix" will stick. You might want to make sure you have a copy of the iPhoto app somewhere outside the main system /Applications folder before you upgrade. I seem to recall that this app doesn't work under El Capitan (at least it didn't first time I tried), but having it might help with any download problems from the App Store. When I did my my current try at using El Capitan (moving up from Mavericks) I seem to recall that iPhoto wasn't a problem. My biggest concern is that when Apple brings out El Supremo (10.12.0) iPhoto will no longer work.
     
  14. jhsonderb macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2015
    #14
    I didn't like Photos either when I first started using it but have warmed up to it. I relied on iPhotos Events like others have stated and after converting my iPhoto library to a Photos library (which retained my iPhoto Events, albeit not useful other that retaining some weak listing of categories that I created), I was frustrated also. However, it forced me to rethink my attempt at organizing and finding photos and found that assigning and using Keywords in the Photos app actually was a much better way for me to find images quickly. It took a lot of effort but I am okay with the Photos app for my purposes. I am not trying to start a feud or anything -- just adding a sympathetic contrary perspective.
     
  15. jasnw macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2013
    Location:
    Seattle Area (NOT! Microsoft)
    #15
    I can see that Photos would be fine for some people, maybe even a large number of people. This is definitely one of those YMMV situations. However, what Apple seems willing to do is jettison all those who need someone to implement more of what iPhoto was able to into Photos. In the vernacular of today, "Apple Don't Care." Steve Jobs was certainly willing to jettison a large chunk of the Apple user base when he felt like it (as in the jump to OS X, and later to Intel processors), but when he did it there was a huge potential payoff for both Apple and its users down the pike a bit. And that payoff typically came through. Lately, if there's anyone gaining from most of these abandonment issues they're on the Apple end.

    I've started looking at third-party photo apps, but haven't found one yet that has the mix of things that are in iPhoto that I use. I hope I find one before iPhoto joins Aperture in the Great Apple Boneyard.
     
  16. ignatius345 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2015
    #16
    I agree. I'm clearly in the minority here, but I've found Photos quite seamless of an experience across two Macs and an iPhone, using iCloud. Any photo I take on the phone appears on the desktop machine and laptop in short order. Any photo I edit on the desktop or laptop, the edit carries over to the other devices pretty quickly. I'm also able to view ALL 30,000+ of my photos on the iPhone without murdering my storage, viewing low-res previews and downloading full-res on demand. Let's not underestimate how cool it is to have all one's photos accessible on a phone, anywhere.

    I still have a couple of gripes, but they're not dealbreakers -- they kick in when you start going into the pro-sumer or hobby level and above:

    - I can't easily use Photoshop CC as an editor right from the Photos interface. I have to export the image, open in Photoshop and re-import. Pretty lame. Photoshop is amazing and I'd way rather use it than the Photos editing tools. They're not terrible, but hey, they're never gonna touch Photoshop.

    - RAW workflow is weak. If you try to import RAW+JPEG right off the card, it imports ALL the RAW files, which gets show-stoppingly huge. I just import the JPEGs from my camera's card and then save selected RAW files in a separate folder in the Finder. So I have to do the manual workaround. Also, I'm definitely not gonna be editing RAW files in Photos' comparatively weak editor when I have Photoshop.

    Still, as a consumer-level product, this is light years away from iPhoto, where you were contantly doing manual imports of your iPhone's camera roll, and then going into iTunes (yikes) to pick which photos to sync back to the phone. What a mess that was!

    Is Photos a replacement for Aperture? No way. They screwed that up and I think people now just use Lightroom I guess? Photos is still working for my basic needs, but if I was a pro, I'd probably jump ship.
     
  17. xtshabi macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2015
    #17
    What's a good alternative to Photos for macs?
     
  18. Fishrrman macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2009
    #18
    xtshabi wrote:
    "What's a good alternative to Photos for macs?"

    iPhoto 9.6.1.
    Seriously.

    Actually, if one is willing to create acompletely independent "photo library" using a conventional folder/file hierarchy, and then set up BOTH iPhoto and Photos to use "referenced" libraries, one can use both apps simultaneously without any interaction between the two.

    Works for me.
     
  19. Big Stevie macrumors 6502a

    Big Stevie

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Location:
    UK
    #19
    When that happens it will cause me to seriously think about stepping away from Apple when the time comes. iPhoto is a big part of the Apple experience for me, more so than many of the other Apple apps.
     
  20. jasnw macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2013
    Location:
    Seattle Area (NOT! Microsoft)
    #20
    This is what I've been considering doing, not necessarily to be able to use both iPhoto and Photos but maybe iPhoto and some third-party app that doesn't force you into some particular storage setup on the disk (or Photos and some third-party app when iPhoto no longer works on OS X). I need to carefully think it so I can use the same approach for all of my various libraries.
     
  21. xmichaelp macrumors 68000

    xmichaelp

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    #21
    It's a new app, give it time. You can still use iPhoto or Aperture until then. No one is forcing you to use it.
     
  22. ApfelKuchen macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2012
    Location:
    Between the coasts
    #22
    I've been resisting replying; feel like a fish swimming upstream. I far prefer Photos to iPhoto.

    First off, if you haven't already, go to the View menu > Show Sidebar - makes Photos far more iPhoto/Aperture-like.

    Believe it or not, the Photos library organizes its image files under the hood (inside the Library database package) the same way iPhoto did - file system folders organized by Year, Month, Day, and individual import session. That's what you'll see if you Get Info for the Photos library and Show Package Contents. Very, very logical. Very close to the way most of the "I need to organize my image files my way" people want to do it.

    Yeah, Photos doesn't have Events, it only has Albums. Events were just special-purpose Albums. You could import images into Events, you couldn't import them into Albums. A photo could only be in one Event, but it can be in multiple Albums. By default, Events were organized by date and import session, which mirrored the way things were organized inside the library.

    In Photos they replaced those default Events with the Years/Collections/Moments views - it still makes it dead simple to find images by date, which for my money was the only thing iPhoto Events were good for. I always used Albums when I needed to categorize my images - my categories almost always transcend a single Import.

    So, you want a container in Photos that represents an entire Import? You can create an Album for that. As long as you don't delete any images from that Album, it's no different than having them in an Event. And if you do accidentally delete something from that Album? Go back to the Year/Collections/Moments view.

    Bursts, Movies, Panoramas, Selfies... they're just ready-made Smart Albums. Search engine results. "Show me all the Panoramas." Multiple, easy ways to find the images you're looking for. Don't look for things that way? Ignore them. They only appear in the sidebar if you have photos that fit those categories. Meantime, the files that contain those indexed search engine results are very small - not a waste of space, not a waste of time.

    For my money, Bursts, Movies, Panoramas, Selfies... all logical, human ways to organize things. Sometimes I want to show off a particular Pano - it's a hell of a lot easier to look in the Panoramas album than to scan through the other 150 shots I took that day. I very rarely want to keep Selfies or Screenshots... they're identified and gone in seconds.

    Now, I often shoot with multiple cameras - a single "import" does not represent a day's shoot. I consolidate all images from that shoot into a single Album, or if the shoot encompassed multiple locations, I might sort them by location, inside a Folder dedicated to the shoot. I often make a Smart Album for Favorites from that shoot (if you don't know how to create Smart Albums... I recommend you learn how - very easy, very useful)... By the way, Smart Albums were part of iPhoto, too.

    Photo Stream works no differently in Photos than it did in iPhoto (or Aperture). If you setup iPhoto/Aperture/Photos Preferences to automatically import your Photo Stream images (normally from your iPhone/iPad), then they're saved to your Mac. They're deleted from iCloud after a month, but the point is, if they've been saved to your Mac, why waste space in iCloud? Think of Photo Stream as a temporary conveyor belt... if you don't take the stuff off the belt in time, it falls into the trash bin at the end of the belt. (The difference with Photos is that it does not create Events for your automatic Photo Stream imports - you find them in the Year/Collection/Moments or All Photos views, and put 'em into whatever Album you want.)

    If you want your images to stay in iCloud, turn on iCloud Photo Library, and start paying Apple monthly for additional storage space. Just understand that, if you do that, anything you delete from your iPhone will also be deleted from your Mac.

    The fundamental difference between iPhoto/Aperture and Photos is this: Photos supports iCloud Photo Library, those other apps don't. They might have redesigned iPhoto and Aperture to be compatible, but the under-the-hood changes would have been huge. So they started from scratch, changed the name, and pissed everyone off. Bottom line, if you don't want/need iCloud Photo Library, keep using iPhoto or Aperture if it makes you happier.
     
  23. Starfia macrumors 6502

    Starfia

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    #23
    What on earth?

    • Straightforward importing
    • Places (viewing photo locations on a map)
    • Cropping
    • Deleting photos permanently

    All those are present in Photos. Obviously things were drastically rearranged and reorganized – I know face lifts can be daunting – but I don't feel like I've lost anything noteworthy after migrating from iPhoto. I use Photos all the time and like it at least as much. I also use Photo Stream and iCloud Photo Sharing with friends and family, which is really nice; a refreshing respite from the rampant socialness of Facebook and such.
     
  24. Big Stevie macrumors 6502a

    Big Stevie

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Location:
    UK
    #24
    Thats a very useful explanation, thanks. I have saved your post and when Apple decide to remove the key, turn off the lights and lock the door to their iPhoto building I shall refer back to you post for guidance, whilst wiping away my tears.

    Thanks.
     
  25. PavelGubarev macrumors newbie

    PavelGubarev

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2015
    #25
    I love Photos: everything I need where I need it. Grouping searching and sorting -- life flying colors. Actually I don't have to do anything. I 'photos' list I see alt the country and events grouped already. Finding the photo I need is a matter or seconds.
    It's also fast and clean. iPhotos was slow and ugly.
     

Share This Page